Optical Cesium or maybe Cesium "light"!
Hi Paul,
On 03/18/2017 03:32 PM, paul swed wrote:
I am in the same frame of mind had the market, so no need to evolve. But
also it seems the business segment is so small its unclear that there is a
good business case to build them.These days if its not $B little interest.
Chuckle.
Hp dumped cesiums and test equipment and then symetricom was purchased by
Microsemi. Pretty strange. All in all in the timing market the players seem
to be all but gone.
Some vendors have been unable to adapt, so they loose market share, cut
products and markets and eventually end up selling the business to some
large player, get consolidated and eventually vanish as a brand. Some of
these created some product which fit a market very well, but later the
solution for that market is tighter integrated and the market is gone,
but there is still lots of timing in there.
At the same time, others come in, silently builds larger and pick market
shares.
As always, things change.
We time-nuts must be careful to save away all useful material when we
can, so that we don't loose manuals, software, app-notes, etc. We cannot
take for granted it will be there next year.
Cheers,
Magnus
In message 2254f8a0-9ea7-e0d3-18d7-90918985c953@rubidium.dyndns.org, Magnus D
anielson writes:
The A magnet being replaced by the A laser will for the same flow from
the cesium oven produce twice as much atoms and thus improve signal to
noise.
It will generate more than twice the (usable) atoms, becuase the
straight path is (almost) insensitive to their velocity distribution,
whereas the corner-turning at the magnet is not.
Not sure if their "100x" claim holds, but it is not patently impossible.
However, the slide-decks claim that atoms are "reused" is 100% bogus.
I also expect that the optical detection does not experience the
same wear mechanisms as the traditional setup. Laser wear is however a
concern, but easier to handle.
That is probably why they have "two redundant laser modules", a complication
they cannot possibly have accepted if they didn't need it.
--
Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
In message 7765b488-bc22-d5af-3f62-d356e4aacff9@karlquist.com, "Richard (Rick
) Karlquist" writes:
NIST-7 has a reversible beam, which cancels out end to end phase
error in the CBT. That works in terms of being a frequency standard,
but not for a clock, because you don't have continuous operation.
You could build one with two beams running opposite directions and still
using the same laser light and RF field, but it would be more complicated.
--
Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Hi,
On 03/18/2017 08:25 PM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
In message 2254f8a0-9ea7-e0d3-18d7-90918985c953@rubidium.dyndns.org, Magnus D
anielson writes:
The A magnet being replaced by the A laser will for the same flow from
the cesium oven produce twice as much atoms and thus improve signal to
noise.
It will generate more than twice the (usable) atoms, becuase the
straight path is (almost) insensitive to their velocity distribution,
whereas the corner-turning at the magnet is not.
True. I was just taking the state selection as such, not other actions
ini the bending.
Not sure if their "100x" claim holds, but it is not patently impossible.
However, the slide-decks claim that atoms are "reused" is 100% bogus.
Until tested, I would take such claims with not only one but several
pinches salt.
I also expect that the optical detection does not experience the
same wear mechanisms as the traditional setup. Laser wear is however a
concern, but easier to handle.
That is probably why they have "two redundant laser modules", a complication
they cannot possibly have accepted if they didn't need it.
Indeed. It reduces the downtime, but even then you would have downtime
to restore redundancy. Hotpluging would be an option, but that always
take some mechanical headache to get working, but for optical stuff has
become simpler these days.
Cheers,
Magnus
I tried lifting it but it wouldn't fit in my bag :(
Hi
Get a bigger bag :)
Bob
On Mar 18, 2017, at 4:45 PM, Wojciech Owczarek wojciech@owczarek.co.uk wrote:
I tried lifting it but it wouldn't fit in my bag :(
<IMG_20161102_1914354.jpg>_______________________________________________
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
On Sat, 18 Mar 2017 19:25:28 +0000
"Poul-Henning Kamp" phk@phk.freebsd.dk wrote:
The A magnet being replaced by the A laser will for the same flow from
the cesium oven produce twice as much atoms and thus improve signal to
noise.
It will generate more than twice the (usable) atoms, becuase the
straight path is (almost) insensitive to their velocity distribution,
whereas the corner-turning at the magnet is not.
I am not sure if that holds true. The Ramsey cavity itself is
velocity sensitive/selective. So not all velocities contribute
the same to the resonance/peak. I do not know how much better/worse
this selectivity compared to the bending magnets is, though.
Attila Kinali
--
It is upon moral qualities that a society is ultimately founded. All
the prosperity and technological sophistication in the world is of no
use without that foundation.
-- Miss Matheson, The Diamond Age, Neil Stephenson
Oh but thats what the marketing blurb even says.
It hit me later that the thing that runs out is still the same CS oven
Regards
Paul
WB8TSL
On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 3:09 PM, Attila Kinali attila@kinali.ch wrote:
On Sat, 18 Mar 2017 19:25:28 +0000
"Poul-Henning Kamp" phk@phk.freebsd.dk wrote:
The A magnet being replaced by the A laser will for the same flow from
the cesium oven produce twice as much atoms and thus improve signal to
noise.
It will generate more than twice the (usable) atoms, becuase the
straight path is (almost) insensitive to their velocity distribution,
whereas the corner-turning at the magnet is not.
I am not sure if that holds true. The Ramsey cavity itself is
velocity sensitive/selective. So not all velocities contribute
the same to the resonance/peak. I do not know how much better/worse
this selectivity compared to the bending magnets is, though.
Attila Kinali
--
It is upon moral qualities that a society is ultimately founded. All
the prosperity and technological sophistication in the world is of no
use without that foundation.
-- Miss Matheson, The Diamond Age, Neil Stephenson
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/
mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.